Sermon Notes

Another great one from Mr. Goldsworthy.  Listen here.  This does change everything.

What is righteousness?

Growing up in the church one is given the distinct impression that to be considered righteous one must follow a set of predefined behaviors such as: not drinking, smoking, swearing, talking about (much less having) sex, doing drugs, engaging in crude conversations, staying away from the “bad crowd,” and so on.

Instead one should go to church every Sunday, find time daily to read your Bible and pray on your knees, and preferably wear a cross or evangelistic t-shirt.  To be pure one must be clean inside and out, and anything less is unholy.

Yet, looking at the “great men of God” in the Bible one has to wonder where did this standard emerge from?  A few case studies to make my point.

Honestly, Abe…

Abraham, the father and founder of Israel, the beacon of faith, the man whose actions God counted as righteous, was a slave owner.  Yes, he bought human beings in a marketplace.  Isn’t slavery, you know, bad?  Should men of God really own other people as property?  I can’t smoke a cigarette yet Abraham is involved in human trafficking?

Wait, there’s more.  Abraham also handed over his wife to a ruler of a country to avoid getting himself killed… twice!  He didn’t just whore Sarah out once, but twice!  Can you imagine telling your wife, “Go sleep with the Prime Minister of France so I don’t get killed.  You’re just too much of a hottie and it’s going to cause trouble.”  And she’d say, “Like we did with the President of Uganda?” and you’d say, “Hey, it worked out great the first time.  See you in a month or so.”

And did you ever notice that Sarah is Abraham’s cousin?  Yikes!  Is that a banjo I hear playing in the background?

Let’s not forget the real doozy.  Because Sarah couldn’t have a baby herself, she had Abraham sleep with her servant (Hagar).  A while later Ishmael is born. Yet once Sarah could have a son she made Abraham send his mistress and his other son off into the desert to die!  Sure, they gave her food and water, but Hagar and Ishmael nearly died!  Hagar put her son under a tree and walked away from him so she wouldn’t have to hear the cries of her own son dying!  Thanks a lot, dad!  We look down on Christians who have gone through a divorce, and we won’t even talk to the ones who don’t pay child support, yet the guy who slept with his maid then sent her and her son away to die we call righteous.

And that’s just Abraham.  What about Noah getting sloshed, or Jacob cheating his brother and playing favorites with his kids, or Moses committing murder?  And David… what a mess that guy was.  It makes you wonder, what exactly are the Biblical qualifications for righteousness?

Righteousness, anyone? Anyone?

Paul addresses the concept of righteousness in Romans 4:18-24. “Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, ‘So shall your offspring be.’ Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead. Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. This is why ‘it was credited to him as righteousness.’ The words ‘it was credited to him’ were written not for him alone, but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.”

What is doing right in God’s eyes?  Trusting in him.  Believing in him.  It is that simple.  Morality, good judgment, avoiding mistakes, tempered emotions, a healthy diet and exercise routine, none of these are counted as righteousness.  Trusting in God is what is “right.”

Can it possibly be that easy?

Actually I think it’s harder.  Trust is the first thing we learn and/or unlearn in this world.  It is the most basic, fundamental, primary interaction we have with all things we experience throughout our whole lives.  It is no wonder faith is how God expects us to find him and stay connected.  He doesn’t want the external actions.  He doesn’t want the showy, exterior goodness that most people can fake.  He wants a direct line to our soul.  And that is done through trust.

Do you trust God?  Do you trust him with your career?  Your house?  Your finances?  Your kids?  Your safety?  Your hopes?  Your fears?  Your crazy ideas?  Your darkest secrets?  Your fantasies?  Your problems?  Your solutions?

If you do, congratulations.  You’re righteous.

If you don’t, give it a try.

If you are working on it and hoping to get there someday… welcome to the club.

Deadly Viper Video Assassin

Well, in a lame attempt to jump into our new sermon series “Deadly Viper Character Assassins“, I made a little intro video.  It sucks.  The sound is screwed up and I couldn’t get the quality of my graphics to look right and some of the timing of the effects are off, but you get the idea.  Enjoy (if that is possible)…

Jesus will save you… but from what?

What have you been saved from?  This was one of the questions asked in church this weekend that really made me think.

My answer is this:  I have been saved from myself.

I know everyone can (and probably should) say that, but what I mean when I say it is that I come from a long bloodline of incredibly critical pessimists.  It is in my nature to critique, destroy, and pick apart anything good.  Sometimes we call it being “grounded”, or being “realistic” but in actuality it is just another form of depression.  It is hopelessness, it is despair, it is lack of faith.  It is a way to mange disappointment and gain control of the unpredictable and difficult world around you.

The logic goes like this: if I have no expectations I can never be hurt.*  If I can filter everything through my head my heart will be safe. I can survive in the face of stark reality by living a sparse and small life–one with no grand experiences, one that allows for no moments of unprotected or unbridled joy.

Life is harsh and it will rob you blind someday, so stay low, stay guarded, stay out of the limelight and hide.  That’s the best thing to do.  Live minimally, cut everything down to size, expect the worst.

But I have been saved.

And where has Jesus brought me?  Into a world of hope.  I see a bright future now.  I think the world is a grand place.  I see the good in people.  I see the potential in the despair.  I see the peace in the chaos.  I see that God is working hard to love us all and that I can be part of that plan.

Now I can trust God that if I loose everything I will still win.  I can ask God for all things, even if they are unrealistic.  I can hope that God will do the big things even if they are pie-in-the-sky ideas.

I can fully embrace the sharp, prickly, tricky and unsafe world around me because I am no longer defined by my success or failure here.  I am no longer defined by what I appear to be now, or by what I hope to be tomorrow.  I am fully defined by God’s love for me.

He saw the hope and beauty in me when I had none, and now I can turn around and see that in others.  Now, I can truly live.

And if you know me now and you think, “Sheesh, this is what you call optimism?”  Just imagine what I was like before.  I’m working on it.  I swear.

Thank you Jesus.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

* This philosophy is best known to the world as Buddhism.  I have never been impressed with Siddhartha’s grand revelation that the world is pain and the best remedy for it is to not hope.  That is not the enlightened path, that is the easy road.  That is the fool’s escape route from real life.  That is the mortal man’s response when he is afraid to ask for divine intervention.

I’m sorry, but Buddhism is not an organized religion, it is systematic depression.  A religion whose goal for mankind is to cease to exist is no religion.  That is suicide of the soul.  That is ultimate despair.  Achievement cannot be defined by giving up.

In my opinion Buddhism is the most commonly believed-in religion in the world, not because lots of people actively participate in it’s formal rules and regulations, but because it is the most natural response to the harshness of life.  It is representative of the most basic human response to hardship.  Run away and hide.

And to that end Siddhartha was right.  Life is too hard on your own.  Life is too big to defeat and control and win.  Life is pain.  Unless you have someone on your side, like the creator of the universe, for example.

Life looks different when the most powerful force in existence says, “I love you and I’m on your side.”  That is true enlightenment.  That’s Jesus.

Have you looked at your family album lately?

I love cathedrals. There are many times I wish that our church met in one. Don’t get me wrong, I have no desire to be Catholic. In fact Catholicism would be near the bottom of my list of preferred denominations. But cathedrals are cool. Not just because of the gothic architecture or the reminder of a time when the church was given a chance to govern the world. I like them because they are filled with history, because they are filled with saints.

Every cathedral is packed top to bottom, wall to wall with a reminder of those who have gone before us on God’s grace and mercy. They are the stone and wood reality of Hebrews 12:1 “…since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses…”

Who has preceded you in your faith? Who is in your family tree of belief? Who are the spiritual pioneers who blazed the trail for the founding of your church, your denomination, your theology, your worldview? Do you know them? Do you know how closely related you are/are not to what they believed?

I can see how Catholics lapsed into a type of worship for these people. They are great men and women of God. They are people to be appreciated. They are people to be honored. I think most Protestants have swung the pendulum to far from our roots. We toggle our understanding of God between the apostles and the present day. We skip all the hundreds of thousands of believers who have done great things in God’s name in between. There is something to be learned from them. There are great stories to tell. There are great legacies to be honored.

Do you go to a Christian Church? Do you know who Alexander Campbell or Barton Stone are? Do you know how much they shaped your belief?

Do you believe in the Trinity? Do you know how hard Athanasius of Alexandria fought against Arius to establish the triune concept of God we endorse today?

Do you practice baptism of individuals who have willingly accepted Christ as their Lord? Do you know that hundreds of Anabaptists died so that you could have that right?

Do you like reading your own personal copy of the Bible in your own language? Do you know that John Wyclife’s remains were exhumed, burned and scattered for suggesting such a concept?

Your faith was shaped by more than just twelve first century Jews. Take a moment and appreciate the great cloud of witnesses who are helping us win the race.

The Garden of Eden Was No Paradise

How would you define paradise? Perfect weather? Free food and shelter? No tears, no fear, happiness and joy all day long? Nakedness, freedom and no work, right? Well, even if you were to read the story in Genesis 2 and 3 literally, this was not case in the Garden of Eden.

Elemental Eden

Unless you believe that God totally restructured the fundamental atomic structure of the universe after Adam and Eve took a bite of the apple then the same basic laws of physics and nature we live under today would’ve applied to anyone living in the Mesopotamian region near the mouth of the Persian Gulf ten thousand years ago.

“Paradise” would’ve consisted of the following: Animals eating other animals, disease, drought, pesky bugs, cuts, bruises, hard work, the normal cycle of life and death and decay for all living things, sweat, sunburn, aging, natural disasters, and on and on and on.

But, suppose for a minute that you decide that life in Eden didn’t have all these current rules of “reality.” That for some reason Adam and Eve didn’t have pain sensors in their brains, and that animals with sharp teeth only played with one another, and that the weather was always nice and sunny, and that fruit grew effortlessly on trees with all the necessary nutrients in every bite. There is still one problem left in Genesis’ description of paradise.

It’s the presence of a little thing called evil.

There’s a snake in my paradise!

Yes, evil, Satan, the deceiver, the devil, the snake was in the Garden. For whatever reason God allowed the devil to run around his perfect creation, which you would think would make it… well, not perfect.

Genesis 3:1 “Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

Talking snakes (and all the subsequent mythological implications) aside, notice how casually the devil is mentioned? There is no suggestion that Satan had to sneak into paradise. There is no special permission granted by God for him to be there as Job implies. Evil’s existence is a given. In fact, it is strongly implied that God intended for evil and temptation to be present. He put the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in his own garden. He put the snake in his own garden.

So let’s take a step back and look at the Garden of Eden once more. The current laws of nature applied. Evil was around. That means Adam and Eve could’ve gotten into a fight and had a divorce. That Eve could’ve contracted breast cancer. That Adam could have been gored by a wild boar and bled to death. That they would’ve had to depend on the whims of nature for their agricultural and husbandry success. And during all that time that they would have had to constantly fend off temptation.

Sounds familiar right? Sounds like every day life for most of the world most everyday.

So what exactly qualified it as paradise?

Fruit, anyone?

That’s easy. Just look at what Adam and Eve lost when they disobeyed God and were cast out of the Garden.

Genesis 3:22: “And the Lord God said, ‘The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.’”

It is not likely that there ever was, or ever could be, a tree whose fruit counteracts the natural effects of aging and has such restorative properties as to permanently protect one from all physical harm. I doubt this was a “fountain of youth” in fruit form.

What defined the garden as paradise, then, was mankind’s wiling obedience to God. This type of obedience, minus any and all disobedience, provided them with direct and unhindered access to the presence of God. This is what the tree of life symbolized.

I think it is just as unlikely that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil had a type of fruit with some kind of secret wisdom hidden inside that a person’s body would absorb like nutrients. It is far more likely that it was less about the food the tree produced and more about the act of obeying, or rather disobeying, God.

Both were symbols of our relationship with God. One represented our unhindered contact with—and our ultimate dependence on—the Almighty. The other represented our desire to know things and do things for ourselves—our desire to break ranks with God.

Thus, the main reason to call the Garden of Eden paradise was due to God’s proximity and relationship with man. The fall of mankind was caused by an act of disobedience, a break in our relationship with our Creator. The result was a distancing of man and God. And when God kicked Adam and Eve out of paradise, he severed the ability for mankind to continue to have this type of relationship with him.

Mankind would now have to have indirect contact with his Creator. He or she would have sacrificial systems and misunderstandings and infrequent encounters as poor substitutes for a direct relationship with God.

Until Jesus came, that is.

Re-establishing contact

Christ’s death and resurrection removes our sin. Our disobedience is erased by his blood. We are innocent in God’s eyes once again.

Then, with the introduction of the Holy Spirit, God’s presence can be with all people at all times.

Thus, God has reestablished his unhindered presence and direct interaction with mankind.

So, back in Eden there was the laws of nature, there was the presence of evil and there was the unhindered connection to God. Considering Jesus’ resurrection fixed this broken connection, I ask: What is so different about living in the Garden then and living as a Christian in the world now?

This must be just like living in paradise

Minus our tendency to wear clothing, I can’t think of anything we should genuinely expect to be different in the world today than the original paradise God set up.

I can think of lots of things I’d like paradise to be. I can dream up lots of ideas of what a better living situation would be. But given the picture of the first concept of paradise and that Jesus came to restore the fundamental piece that held it all together and defined it as paradise, can I really expect heaven to be any different?

Makes you wonder, are we in the Garden now? Is this paradise? Is this what Jesus meant when he said his kingdom has already come?

Welcome to paradise.

Genesis: truth and myth and true myths

The number one myth that hinders Christianity isn’t the creation account, or the Garden of Eden, or the fact that most Christians don’t consider them myths. The number one myth is that in order for Christianity to be true it must be an original concept. It must be a unique revelation of the truth by God.

The syllogism that many believers buy into is that 1) truth is contained in primary, or original, concepts, and that 2) all truth comes from God and therefore 3) God’s revelations of truth to his people must be unique from the world around them.

Belief like this makes Christianity a brittle faith. One need only to find a truth not revealed in the Bible—or one that runs counter to the Bible’s claims, or one that was written before the Bible was written—and one has disproved God.

Defensive = Offensive

Taking stock in this type of logic morphs Christianity from a progressive ideal into a defensive dogma. If we continue to believe this notion then Christianity will always be at a great disadvantage when faced with historical facts, science and everyday reality.

Since the discovery of the Enuma Elis, the Gilgamesh Epic, the Ugarit, the Code of Hamurabi, and many other ancient documents that appear to predate the Torah, along with the progress science has made over the last century in dating artifacts and reconstructing the origins of life, we believers are starting to realize we need to face a new truth:

We have pagan roots and they are starting to show.

But, I don’t think that makes what we believe in any less true or authentic.

The proof is in the primordial pudding

To put it simply, I think that the creation account in Genesis is a derivative of the Babylonian and Sumerian accounts. The Jewish nation emerged from these people groups and naturally they took these stories with them and evolved them as they became their own culture.

The establishment of a culture is a daunting task. It involves establishing a world view, establishing a system for tracking and relating important events throughout time, establishing a way to explain natural and unnatural phenomena, and asserting a good reason for that culture’s primacy in the world. All with the good faith that it is true.

This is why I think many cultures share the same types of creation myths. They are all seeking the truth and therefore are all borrowing what is perceived to be true from one another. They are claiming another culture’s truth as their own, and seeking to improve and refine the understanding of that truth to make better sense of the world around them.

In the (borrowed) beginning…

Gen. 1:1-2: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.”

Reading this today we probably conjure up the image of the white-haired, bearded, father-figure-like-God of Michelangelo’s imagination floating around in space and time with a creative sparkle in his eye. But to the original audience this story it already had a familiar imagery associated with it. Sumerian and Babylonian imagery.

The first name for God used in the Bible is “Elohim” which is a Babylonian word for the pantheon of gods under El, the chief, father, creator god. Sure, the author of Genesis is treating it as a singular name, but he is still borrowing the name, or more likely the concept.

This would be the equivalent of me writing the first verse today as, “in the beginning the IRS created…” or, “in the beginning Sponge Bob created…” or, “in the beginning Microsoft created…” These are known identities, known concepts in our culture. I may be looking to redefine them by my usage, but they are by no means original.

The borrowing from Sumerian myths and culture continues from there:

• The separation of the waters in verse 6 matches the ancient world view that the world was made up of three disks. The ground, or earth was one disk, then beneath the earth was a disk of water (the deep), and up in the sky was a disk of water, as well (the sky).
• A supreme god overcoming chaos as the first act of creation (in Babylonian El conquering Tiamat, the dragon, in Hebrew Elohim hovering over Tehom, the deep).
• The creation of man by combining dirt and divinity (in Genesis God breaths his spirit into Adam who is formed out of dust, in Babylonian culture Ea kills Kingu and mixes his blood with the dirt to make mankind).

There are a dozen points of overlap in these culture’s creation myths, just as there are a dozen points of divergence. But how much was borrowed isn’t nearly as important as why.

Creation as an evolving story

The seven days of creation isn’t intended to explain how fast God created the world, it is meant to explain why the world works in seven day cycles. This isn’t science, it’s logic. It’s a rationalization for the natural cycles of time. The Babylonians associated their days of the week to the planets, the Romans and Greeks to the gods, the Jews to the acts of God.

Mankind being formed from the dust of the ground just isn’t true (we share more similar material connection to vegetables than minerals), but mankind being a combination of the elements of this world and the divine is.

Do we need to defend the creation account in Genesis as science? No. It isn’t science. (The invention of day and night three days before the creation of the sun and moon? Really?).

Do we need to justify it as original or as 100% truth? No. It isn’t. It is a borrowed story that was gleaned from the cultures around it and improved upon.

The creation account in Genesis is a myth meant to explain a world view, a way to frame the story mankind is in.

And to that end, it is a great story because it addresses man’s fundamental quest. Not for power, food or sustenance, or even eternal life (as the Gilgamesh epic aspires to). No, Genesis relates man’s quest to reconnect with God.

The truth behind the truth

We’d all like to think our belief system came fully revealed and neatly packaged starting in chapter one of Genesis. In reality, Noah and Abraham probably wouldn’t have seen eye to eye on their belief; and Abraham probably wouldn’t have recognized Moses’ beliefs as his own; and Moses wouldn’t have looked on Paul’s belief as the exact same as his; and Paul would have a hard time figuring out what the heck the 21st century American evangelical church was up to at times.

Our perception and understanding of truth evolves over time. As we grasp one part of it, another comes to light. We take what we know from the culture we’re in and apply what we have experienced and know of God and mix the two. When a thread of truth is found, the next generation latches on to that and improves it.

All of us Christians need to get over the notion that what we believe in is unique and original. What we believe is true. And truth can, has, and will continue to be discovered by many other people independent of God’s direct revelation.

God’s revelation is no myth

As I see it, God never set out to reveal truth, per se, his aim has always been to reveal himself. Look at the beginnings of our faith. Abraham was met by God. Moses was met by God. Judges and kings of Israel were confronted by God through prophets and dreams. Jesus was God in the flesh.

Our faith isn’t about knowing all the truths of the world—like how amino acids work, and whether or not Jupiter’s orbit has an effect on our emotional state, or how life began—it is about knowing the Creator and what he thinks about how the world is run and how much he likes you.

Truth in the Bible isn’t meant to be scientific fact, it is meant to reflect the true nature of God’s efforts to have a relationship with mankind.

How do I know this is true? I have a relationship with God. I have met him. He has met me. And this makes the world make sense.

God wants to have a relationship with you. This is the structure of the world. This is the truth behind the creation story.

Today’s sermon notes

Good news or bad news?  Fear or security? What do you read in today’s headlines?

“They will have no fear of bad news; their hearts are steadfast, trusting in the Lord. Their hearts are secure, they will have no fear;” – Psalm 112:7-8

Scars in the afterlife

We assume a lot about what life in heaven will be like–clouds, streets of gold, mansions, saints wandering around in togas, breakfast with God, etc.–but we are told precious little about it in Scripture. Yet, our hopes and expectations are generally very high. And why not? It just sounds right that in the afterlife all of our ills will be cured and all our wounds healed. That would be perfect, right?

Yet that is not what the evidence suggests.

The holes in our assumptions

Our only true case study on this subject is Christ himself. He’s the only one we know for sure went there. He’s also the only one on record of being seen before he left.

And Jesus went into heaven with scars.

John 20:26-27: A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you!” Then he said to Thomas, “Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.”

A few observations: 1) Jesus’ post-resurrection body is capable of “mysteriously materializing” in different places. 2) Jesus’ post-resurrection body had repaired itself of the crucifixion induced complications that led to his death (most likely asphyxiation and blood loss, possibly dehydration or hearth failure). 3) Jesus’ post-resurrection body still had noticeable enough wounds to convince others that he was the same man they saw crucified.

Me minus death

If you’re like me, you’ve probably assumed (or still assume) that we will enter heaven with a “new body”, or at minimum a “best version” of our current selves. Maybe what we looked like ten years and twenty pounds ago. With better hair. However, the descriptions of Jesus after his resurrection seem contrary to this belief.

If our entrance into the afterlife is consistent with Christ’s then the elderly will not be made young, the person missing an arm will not have it restored, the blind will not be see. The only thing cured would be fatality. We go into the next world as we left the previous one.

But would we recognize the place we enter as heaven if people didn’t look any different than they do here? What about the glorified bodies and stuff? Sure it’d be cool to beam around place to place like Jesus did, but shouldn’t my new body, you know, look better? Be whole again? Be perfected?

Perfection defined

I think the Crash Test Dummies put it best in their song, “God Shuffled His Feet”

…the people sipped their wine
And what with God there, they asked him questions
Like: do you have to eat
Or get your hair cut in heaven?
And if your eye got poked out in this life
Would it be waiting up in heaven with your wife?

God shuffled his feet and glanced around at them;
The people cleared their throats and stared right back at him

So he said:”Once there was a boy
Who woke up with blue hair
To him it was a joy
Until he ran out into the warm air
He thought of how his friends would come to see;
And would they laugh, or had he got some strange disease?

The people sat waiting
Out on their blankets in the garden
But God said nothing
So someone asked him: “I beg your pardon:
I’m not quite clear about what you just spoke
Was that a parable, or a very subtle joke?”

God shuffled his feet and glanced around at them;
The people cleared their throats and stared right back at him

Where does our idea of perfection come from? How do we define what is acceptable, and good and whole with regards to our existence? Do we have the right to define it ourselves?

What to expect in the next life

Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t think anyone missing their legs should get denied a new pair in heaven. I don’t think the blind should be denied a chance to see, or the deaf a chance to hear. And I’m not saying that these gifts won’t be given to people in heaven. All I’m saying is that maybe we shouldn’t expect them.

So, where do our expectations of heaven come from? From our hopes? Our culture? Our wants? Our wishes? Isn’t that how every culture and every religion has defined heaven? Isn’t the afterlife generally just an idealized version of that culture’s values? Shouldn’t we as Christians set the bar higher than our cultural likes and dislikes? Shouldn’t there be some definitive truth behind our ultimate hope? Shouldn’t we look forward to eternity with concepts based on what God considers important rather than what we value for ourselves at this current point in time?

Would you be surprised to meet Jesus in heaven and see that he still has scars on his hands and feet?

Today’s sermon notes

I created this image to capture my thoughts on today’s sermon on Matthew 25: 14-30. In summary: use it or lose it, bub.